Review: John Reed, Ten Days That Shook the World
Barney Doherty
thing but a detailed account’ of the revolution, amongst its pages are counters to the
common criticism of the revolution as well as
several important lessons for revolutionaries
today.
Immediately in Ten Days That Shook the
World, Reed reveals how Russian society was
in a flux. Ideas were being debated on street
corners and in large halls, all of Russia, he
writes, ‘was learning to read politics, economics, history because people wanted to
know.’ The masses were not passive spectators of the political discussion but were
energetic participants.
Reed commented that by October the
period of the February Revolution seemed
conservative by comparison. Russian politics ‘swung bodily to the Left’ as the masses
grew in confidence and changed the parameters of political discourse, ‘until the Cadets
were outlawed as ‘enemies of the people’,
Kerensky became a ‘counter-revolutionist’,
the ‘middle’ Socialist leaders... were too reactionary for their following’. (p. 36)
The revolution in October was part of a
wider process of human liberation, as people
were actively involved in conciously shaping their society. The levels of engagement
were so high in fact Reed asked, with ‘such a
deluge of high and hot thoughts that surely
Russia would never again be dumb!’ (p.137)
Lenin described revolutions as ‘festivals of
the oppressed and the exploited’ and this description certainly matches the events from
Reed’s account.
The mass participation involved contradicts the most common criticism of the revolution, that it was an undemocratic coup
orchestrated by Lenin and the Bolsheviks.
This critique usually contends that the Provisional Government led by Kerensky had
the only democratic mandate. From reading
Ten Days That Shook the World, however,
one understands the flourishing of democracy that had taken place.
The revolution gave power to the Soviets which were ‘the direct representatives
of millions on millions of common workers,
John Reed, Ten Days That Shook the World
The centenary of the Russian Revolution
in 1917 is obviously significant for Marxists.
This year will see attempts to misrepresent
the revolution or questions its democratic
nature or political necessity.
Revolutionary socialists, therefore, must
study the event themselves and understand
how it happened and what its significance
was. A good place to start is with John
Reed’s Ten Days That Shook the World. In
this book, Reed gives a first-hand journalistic account of the revolution as it unfolded
around him.
Reed was a socialist activist and journalist from the US who was covering the
October Revolution for the magazine ‘The
Masses’. From his collection of primary
documents and transcripts of speeches and
debates he attended, Reed constructs an
overview of the developing political landscape and brings the reader through the
rapidly moving events with impressive clarity.
Reed’s powerful writing style brilliantly
captures the excitement and spirit of the
revolutionary period from the streets of St.
Petersburg to the rapturous halls of the
Congress of Soviets. While he maintained
that the book ‘does not pretend to be any79
soldiers, peasants’. (p. 36) The Bolshevik
call for ‘all power to the Soviets’ was not
a negation but an extension of democracy,
as it gave direct authority to the masses in
both the political and crucially the economic
sphere.
Reed’s account is filled with descriptions
of this radical democracy or ‘people power’
in action. ‘Everywhere the same thing happened. The common soldiers and the industrial workers supported the Soviets by a vast
majority.’ (p. 147) The existence of soviets in factories and barracks meant that the
masses were truly involved in the organising
their lives. The revolution grew from the
immediate and ‘moderate’ demands of the
masses for land, bread and peace.
Reed’s sympathies were with the proletariat; nevertheless his book recognises
the deep divide in the society and brilliantly demonstrates the effect that counterrevolutionary forces can have at the pivotal
times. New formations such as the Committee of Salvation were set up to confront the
influence of the Soviets.
was their battle, for their world; the officers in command were elected by them... the
anonymous hordes of the people... rose like
a tide and poured over the enemy’ claiming
power for themselves. (p. 201)
Class interests are magnified in a revolution. Many who were active in the February Revolution, turned against the movement and sided with reactionary forces as
the workers got closer to gaining power.
These lessons are vital for future struggles,
it is important to know the limits of political
ideologies.
The revolution shown in Ten Days That
Shook the World is not an idealised representation. It was not created by the Bolsheviks, as Reed wrote it ‘had not come as they
expected it would come, nor as the intelligentsia desired it; but it had come – rough,
strong, impatient of formulas, contemptuous
of sentimentalism; real’ (p. 134)
This ‘real’ revolution threw everything in
the air. It was certainly not guaranteed that
the Bolsheviks would win the majority to
their side. From the collapse of the status
quo emerged various ideological positions.
Workers could be pulled by many competing
ideas. As Reed eloquently explained ‘Old
Russia was no more; human society flowed
molten in primal heat, and from the tossing
sea of flame was emerging the class struggle.’
(p. 147)
The strength of the Bolsheviks was their
ability to react to the revolutionary moment
and offer a leadership which was critical. After months of struggle and principled campaigning the popular call for ‘land, bread
and peace’ and ‘All power to the Soviets’
culminated in support for the revolution and
the Bolsheviks. The revolutionary period
was a learning process in which the masses
developed a new consciousness and fought
for a new type of society, a socialist one. The
Bolsheviks remained principled in their campaign to support the emancipation of the
working class.
Nothing could be more striking
than the contrast between this
[Committee of Salvation] and the
Congress of Soviets.
There,
great masses of shabby soldiers, grimy workmen, peasants
- poor men, bent and scarred
in the brute struggle for existence; here the Menshevik and
Socialist Revolutionary leaders...
rubbed shoulders with Cadets...
with journalists, students, intellectuals. This Duma crowd was
well fed, well dressed; I did not
see more than three proletarians
among them all. (p. 123)
These class contradictions explain the
reason why most other political parties were
not supportive of the October Revolution.
Reed quotes Trotsky who pointed out that
these ‘parties which march against us... are
isolated, and for ever cut off from the proletariat!’ (p. 141)
This is at the core of the book, Reed
points out that the revolution was not won
by the Bolsheviks but by the people. ‘This
So plunged the Bolsheviks
ahead, irresistible, overring hesitation and opposition – the
only people in Russia who had
a definite programme of action
80
while others talked for eight long
months. (p. 137)
tion the old Government mechanism, did the Bolsheviki conquer
the power. Nor by the organised violence of a small clique. If
the masses all over Russia had
not been ready for insurrection it
must have failed. The only reason for Bolshevik success lay in
their accomplishing the vast and
simple desires of the most profound strata of the people, calling them to the work of tearing down and destroying the old
and afterwards, in the smoke of
falling ruins, cooperating with
them to erect the framework of
the new. (p.254)
As Irish revolutionaries in 2017 it is obvious that the conditions we organise in are
vastly different to those of Russia in 1917.
This does not mean though that we should
ignore the lessons that were hard-learned
through struggle by the Russian revolutionaries.
Ten Days That Shook the World captures vividly that in times of revolutionary
movements society is in huge fluctuation and
from this breeds a multitude of ideas. The
book demonstrated the need for a revolutionary party to offer leadership. That party
though, like the Bolsheviks, must be rooted
in movements and struggle to build the confidence of the working class.
The simple and most powerful lesson
from Ten Days That Shook the World is
that it is only through the revolutionary selfemancipation of the working class that a
true socialist alternative can emerge.
Not by compromise with the
propertied classes, or with the
political leaders; not by concilia-
81